[JonnyBGood]

In fairness max actually has somewhat of a point here.Clearly it looks like rock played the political game fairly well given that they're in their highest ranking ever right now. Of course the round is hardly over but still it'd be unfair to say they've played "bad politics". They may have played stagnative politics in the sense that they've picked a side that's clearly superior and just stuck with it. They may have played unimaginative politics in the sense that the opportunity for #1 is clearly there but I doubt they've even thought about it. But bad politics no.

Realistically all this is just the end result of the fact that there are so very few alliances left playing the game. We have maybe 5-600 people in various stages of activity spread over 8 or 9 alliances. However it's not like the most active are concentrated in the top 2 or 3 alliances who are going for #1, or even that there are 3 alliances going for #1. I'm pretty sure ND had no intention of doing so until a number of ascendancy members joined them. I don't think it ever occurred to rock or oddr. For some reason, primarily because CT and ND have been contenders for #1 in past rounds, there's some sort of perception that these alliances should fight for #1, along with apprime and ascendancy if they played, but that everyone else, because they were frequently outside the top 5 alliances if they played, should just toddle along doing what they want. I mean, if ND and CT shut down after this round and their members went elsewhere what the **** would actually happen? Seriously?